Closed prompt 1- 2008 question 2

Student 2A: This student does a remarkable job pointing out specific parts of the passage that support his discussion of Arun, which is highly sophisticated. He/she perfectly characterizes Arun's discomfort by describing a "more permanent unsettled feeling" and "deeper emotion of disgust and outright disbelief at the situation." The handwriting was hard to read, but this did not detract from the quality of the analysis. The student clearly understands the emotional nuances and subtle changes in language that the writer uses to evoke Arun's complicated feelings towards his host family and the general situation. Part of what makes the essay particularly effective is the way the student organizes these nuances chronologically, allowing the essay's structure to reflect the organization and interpretation of the passage. Had the essay been a little more specific in some places, it may have earned a 9, but an 8 is still an exceptionally high score.

Student 2B: This essay starts off with some very good points,  but ultimately falls short of its potential because of a lack of textual support and general brevity in the development of the ideas. The student does an excellent job relating Arun's perspective to the behavior of the mother, pointing out her self-contentment and the "ironic" summertime lyrics. However, these observant details do not do enough to support the main argument of the essay. The student also makes a good point about the "internal monologue" and even repeats that expression, but does not expand on it enough. Internal monologue clearly plays a huge role in this piece, and capitalizing on its importance would have made for a slam-dunk interpretation. This is a typical issue for students who comprehend the literature on the test, but do not fulfill their implied understanding in the essay. Despite its shortcomings, the ideas are strong enough to earn it a respectable 6.

Student 2C: This student seems to have one main idea about the passage, and that is that Arun prefers the city to the country. Maybe he/she skimmed this or maybe just gave up, but when it gets to the point that the student regards "speech" and "point of view" as fully formed literary devices requiring no further characterization, one knows the essay is doomed. Despite having clear language and legibility, the essay demonstrates a very limited grasp of the passage and does not expand on any ideas effectively. Much of the small details that well-written essays not only mention but take advantage of are lost on this student. Simplifying Arun's behavior down to the fact that he is from India and his hosts are American and thus prefer "leisure" is about as competent an interpretation as that which a passing stranger could grasp from reading the overhead description. Perhaps that stranger's essay is presented here. If that is the case, a 4 really isn't too bad.

Ceremony Summary and Analysis

Ceremony centers on the experiences of Tayo and how they relate to his spiritual and physical connections to his Laguna-Pueblo heritage. While fighting in the Philippines during WWII, he hallucinates that a dead Japanese soldier is his uncle, Josiah. He is further traumatized when his brother, Rocky, dies in battle. These events are the primary catalysts for his journey towards holistic revival. After the war, he spends some time in a veterans' hospital. Throughout this stay, it is clear that while he may be physically healing, he is invisible: "They saw an outline but they did not realize it was hollow inside."

This part shows that medically, there is nothing for the white people to diagnose him with. The problem is intrinsically spiritual. Later,  this section mentions a painful reaction to sunlight, which develops gradually into a healing force. He is plagued by constant vomiting.

When he returns home, we hear more about his childhood and his relationship to Josiah and Rocky. He is primarily raised by his Grandmother and Aunt, as his mother left the community after bearing Tayo to a white father. We find that during his time in the war, Josiah did actually die. In addition, from a spiritual standpoint, he "prayed" the rain away while fighting in the jungle, supposedly causing the 6-year drought for his people. We hear vivid poetry about the ancient myths involving the gambler and the lack of rain, which can be applied to Tayo's actual situation. He interacts with other veterans, but they do little to console him.

To seek help, he undergoes a ceremony with Ku'oosh. It does not rid him of his problems,  but it leads him towards more self-reflection. He considers his childhood and recalls one particularly important visit with Josiah's Mexican girlfriend, Night Swan. They have an affair which helps him spiritually. After Ku'oosh, he sees Betonie. Betonie has him apply ancient beliefs to create a contemporary ceremony,  central to the theme of the novel. Betonie says, "[People] think the ceremonies must be performed exactly as they have always been done . . . You see, in many ways, the ceremonies have always been changing."

This directly relates to the theme, that spiritual and familial connection requiring the straddling of multiple races and cultures, is critical to maintaining harmony with the world, especially as that world becomes more fragmented in every way. In essence, a dependence on unity in a modern context.
Betonie also describes Native American suffering in terms of "witchery." Tayo sets out again, and after falling back into old patterns with the other veterans, begins on a search for Josiah's cattle, These cattle are hybrids and represent a modern resilience to cultural conformity, as seen by their stubbornness. He meets Ts'eh, who is nameless until later on. He goes into the mountains, finds the cattle, and gets caught by two white policemen who let him go to go chase a mountain lion he encountered earlier. He finds that Ts'eh rounded up the cattle and then returns home. He spends the next summer with Ts'eh, but then she warns him that Emo has been convincing the rest of the tribe that Tayo is insane. Tayo follows Ts'eh's instructions and manages to avoid the police. He meets Harley and Leroy, but then realizes that while they appear friendly, they are really working for Emo. His efforts to escape lead him to the culminating point of his ceremony, an abandoned uranium mine. This symbolizes the white destruction of the land for the purpose of destruction that exceeds all spiritual contemplation. This relates to Ku'oosh's inability to understand modern warfare. He spends the night in the mine, having to see Harley tortured at Emo's command. Resisting killing Emo is his test against the forces of witchery. Afterwards, the drought finally ends and Tayo appears to have reached a balance with nature and his community.

Response to Course Material

This past cycle, we have done a lot of work with Leslie Marmon Silko's Ceremony. I have enjoyed our discussions so far. I especially liked connecting the relationship between the number four and the different poems to the directions, seasons, and colors used throughout the book.

In order to fully understand Ceremony, we read it through twice. The first time, I used a pdf that I printed out online and did not read very carefully. In addition, the strange formatting of the pdf actually detracted from the enjoyment in reading the text because the spaces between lines, especially the within the formatting of the poems, was actually fairly significant. I am guessing that others did not read as closely the first time through, because our discussions were not very meaningful.

The second reading, where annotations were required, I used an actual copy of the novel. While this had more pages, I found it considerably more enjoyable to read and had an easy time annotating. I definitely could have benefited from starting my annotations a bit earlier, but I managed my time more effectively than with the Foster annotations and actually completed the novel hours before what I would consider "late" Sunday night.

We also read Sherman Alexie's "Defending Walt Whitman." I enjoyed reading this poem a lot, and I thought that I contributed to the discussion with my interpretation. Essentially, I saw it as putting Whitman, a great romantic poet that defined the "American" romantic movement into a situation where he is intimately involved, or thinks that he is, with the interactions on the Native American reservation. In fact, he is not even there, and what he sees as part of this great sensual experience is not something he even understands. He believes he is controlling a game that he is not even playing in. I thought that overall, we had a productive discussion of this poem as a class.

Response to Prompt #1 2009

"In the following speech from Shakespeare’s play Henry VIII, Cardinal Wolsey considers his sudden downfall from his position as advisor to the king. Spokesmen for the king have just left Wolsey alone on stage. Read the speech carefully. Then write a well-organized essay in which you analyze how Shakespeare uses elements such as allusion, figurative language, and tone to convey Wolsey’s complex response to his dismissal from court."

            Understanding Wolsey’s soliloquy requires the reader to examine the changes in tone during his response to dismissal, and what these changes indicate about his emotional state. In the process of expressing himself, he uses a variety of literary devices and allusions. The soliloquy can be broken up into three different stages in his reaction. In the first (1-9), he expresses anger and frustration at such a rash decision. In the second (9-15), he is more self-reflective, trying to justify his dismissal by considering his own behavior, and in the final section (16-23), he considers what has happened to him from a more general perspective.

Wolsey’s tone in the first section can be seen as both contemptuous and enraged. This is clear from the first line when he says “Farewell-to the little good you bear me.” He mainly portrays himself as a victim of circumstance, using a metaphor to compare himself to a flowering plant who “falls” because of a “killing frost” (9, 6). In essence, he first sees the king’s hasty decision is one of malicious deliberation, intended to stifle his own potential.

In the second section, Wolsey takes a step back to look at how he ended up in this situation. He uses the simile of the “wanton boys that swim on bladders” to describe his own “high blown pride,” saying that he considered himself more important than how the king actually valued him. The simile relates directly to his fall from power by comparing it to the bladder breaking under him (10, 12, 13). While it would be more clearly elucidated in a live performance, it appears through the shift from accusation to contemplation that Wolsey has calmed down and begun to consider the errors in his ways and not simply the injustice of his predicament.

The final section of the soliloquy is considerably more broadly applicable than the preceding lines. After overcoming his initial reaction and reflecting, he now returns to a more aggravated state to say “how wretched is that poor man that hangs on princes’ favors!” (17-18). He considers the service at the hands of royalty a great burden, not only because of the task itself, but because of the pain of a fall from the king’s graces. In fact, he considers the contrast between working for the king and the rejection that he suffered comparable to a fall from the grace of God. This is clear when he states that when a man working for a monarch falls, “he falls like Lucifer.” Not only does this allusion to the Biblical story of the fallen angel express the literal magnitude of his demotion, but how a fall from the favor of Henry VIII is as detrimental as a fall from heaven into hell in this society.

Overall, Shakespeare uses Wolsey’s soliloquy to express a deeply complex, personal reaction in beautifully concise language. Through this reaction, he also succeeds in providing the audience with a historical perspective on the harrows of living in a society ruled by a king as quick tempered as Henry VIII from the intimate viewpoint of one of his closest advisers. 

Closed Prompt 1-11/15/15

2009 Exam-Prompt 1:

Student 1A: This student has a remarkably complete and accurate analysis of Cardinal Woosey's soliloquy. His/her essay is broken into perfectly organized paragraphs that focus on diction, figurative language, and tone. The primary strength of the essay is in its organization. The student uses these different aspects of the poem to demonstrate understanding of the different literary devices present and also provide further analysis and interpretation. Within that organization, however, the content is equally strong. I was especially impressed with how he/she connected the shift in tone with the intricate variety of emotions Wolsey expresses. While the language can be repetitive at times, the argument is sophisticated and such minor imperfections should be forgiven. It is also important to remember the time constraints this essay was written under, making its achievement of a 9 impressive to say the least.

Student 1B:  This essay is overall well-written but generally lacks interpretive depth. The student appears to understand the language of the poem quite well and uses ample textual evidence, but the analysis of the evidence does not justify its quantity. It seems that overall, the student refrained from using the examples and interpretive ideas he/she clearly extrapolated to further an argument based around the literary devices present, choosing instead to use the interpretations as the argument. For example, the student refers to Wolsey’s tone as “cathartic” at one point, but never explicitly demonstrates that he/she really knows what this means. If the student had been clearer, his/her strong understanding of the text could have warranted a score higher than 6.

Student 1C: Glancing at the essay and reading the introduction, I was at first confused over why it scored so low. However, it is clear after the first few lines that the student simply did not organize the content of the essay to fit the argument, nor did he/she even interpret part of the poem correctly. The primary mistake in interpretation was due to a poor attempt to scale back the language to apply it erroneously in too general a context. While the other essays mentioned the universally human qualities of Wolsey’s frustrations, they did not base their entire interpretation off of it. This makes a great deal of sense because, of course, the soliloquy is part of an overall play, and should not be compared to a work with broader intention such as a stand-alone poem or short story. Because of the poor interpretation and lack of organization, the essay scored only a 4.

Response to Course Material- 10/25/15

Since the last prompt about the course material, a lot has happened. Perhaps the most challenging assignment we had so far was the foster annotations. I enjoyed reading the book, but sadly made the same mistake as I did with The Nuts of Bolts of College Writing and I started my annotations far too late. However, this time it was not entirely due to my own inertia when it comes to starting long assignments. The entire assignment just slipped my mind. I have actually owned this book since eighth grade, when I started reading it in response to the tedium of my actual middle school lit class. At the time, I did not appreciate the applicability of Foster's interpretive suggestions. Reading this book again with an understanding of archetypal analysis already helped considerably. My assigned chapter was about the importance of season to the events in fiction. I thought it was amusing how he connected this to the lyrics of the Beach Boys, and so naturally I chose "Surfin' USA" as my corresponding popular culture reference. Overall, I enjoyed reading How to Read Literature Like a College Professor, and I don't believe I will be able to read another work of fiction without looking for the hidden, deeper intentions of the author.

In addition to the Foster, I enjoyed our discussions of American Dream.  I feel that we came up with a fairly all-encompassing theme statement, and that we were able to point out a lot of the main messages Albee wanted to convey. Of course, I was not thrilled taking the exam on American Dream, but I at least took comfort in my own understanding of absurdism and my ability to apply it under such stressful circumstances. The idea of a "theater of the absurd" was not even something I had heard of before this course, and yet now I feel it is crucial for accurately describing a large amount of contemporary literature.

My favorite new activity in A.P. Literature is probably the use of vocabulary.com. I found this site extremely useful for learning new words and broadening my understanding of words I thought I knew by introducing them in unfamiliar contexts. I will certainly continue to practice with this site to expand my verbal skills and maybe just for fun as well.

These three topics help with writing and analysis considerably, especially when used together. Understanding the general intentions and allusions that recur over and over again in literature is necessary for anyone interesting in fully appreciate the work of the greats. In addition, keeping in mind the possibility that an author may be implementing ideas from the theater of the absurd may be completely necessary for understanding more esoteric text. Those two skills combined with a generally superior vocabulary are bound to make me a much stronger scholar, for both this class, and down the road of higher education.

Edward Albee - American Dream Summary and Analysis

Summary:

The play opens with Mommy and Daddy in armchairs discussing a third party that seems to be late. Mommy recounts her experience with buying a beige hat, which turned out to be “wheat” instead. She makes a big fuss over this, causing a scene. Mommy expresses that she “got satisfaction” from this encounter. Grandma enters with nicely wrapped boxes and drops them at Daddy’s feet. This prompts a series of complaints about Grandma, who launches into a tirade about how old people are treated, saying that they “die eventually” because “people talk to them that way” (65).  Mommy and Grandma then discuss Mommy’s childhood and how she always wanted to marry into money.

Later, the tardy guest of whom Mommy had complained earlier rings the doorbell. When Daddy goes to get the door, Mommy berates him over his masculinity. Next, Mrs. Barker enters and we find that she is the chairman of the Women’s Club to which Mommy belongs. Mrs. Barker wants to assume she is there for the boxes, but this triggers another argument between Mommy, Daddy, and Grandma, who also believes that to be the reason. We hear about Daddy’s “stiches” for the first time. When Mommy leaves to get Mrs. Barker water, Grandma tells Mrs. Barker about a couple “very much like” Mommy and Daddy, who bought a “bumble” from the bye bye adoption service. She describes the way the parents mutilated the child until it died, at which point they “wanted satisfaction; they wanted their money back.” In the meantime, Mommy and Daddy are struggling to find Grandma’s things, a major aspect of the play’s absurdity. Mrs. Barker does not seem to pick up on what Grandma is implying.

When Mrs. Barker leaves to get a glass of water for herself, the Young Man enters. Grandma is impressed with him immediately, first asking if he is the “van man” and then labeling him “the American dream.” Grandma and the Young man discuss why he is there and what he could do. She reveals an anecdote about how she one a baking contest with a store-bought cake. The Young man then explains why he will do anything for money. He says that he is an empty shell of a person, feeling nothing and only providing service to others with his body. He refers to the early loss of an identical twin, whom Grandma realizes is the bumble, as the reason for his condition. The Young Man helps Grandma with her boxes as she exits. Mommy and Daddy find her gone and after brief disappointment are delighted to find the Young Man as the bumble’s replacement. The play ends with Grandma offstage, breaking the fourth wall to say that they should stop “while everybody’s happy.”

Analysis:

The major symbols in the play are the boxes, the “bumble,” and perhaps the Young Man himself. The boxes represent the components of Grandma’s life, which embody a more genuine “American Dream.” The bumble and the Young Man go together as two parts of the same person. The bumble represents his emotional and internal vitality, which was destroyed by the societal mores Mommy and Daddy imposed. This leaves the Young Man hollow, only carrying a shell of a promise for success, which is perhaps what Mommy and Daddy are receiving as a result of their falsification of the American Dream. The tone is mainly built on the absurd style of the play. This leaves the audience with a sense of disarray and confusion as the dialogue makes sense on a superficial level, but does not have a deeper meaning. It is hard to describe specific imagery in the play, since this is dependent on the performance. The color of the hat or the physical description of the Young Man are good examples of imagery, although lacking in specificity. As a class, we came up with the statement that in American Dream, “Edward Albee shows that as materialism gains prominence in society, traditional values erode leaving the American Dream a façade.” The absurd plot contributes to the presentation of the American Dream as a façade, because the elements that would indicate sincerity now are all part of the tapestry of non-sequiturs and incongruities that encapsulate the discussions of “satisfaction” and “ambition.”

Two important and highly applicable quotes are first, when Grandma says, “That's why old people die, eventually. People talk to them that way.” This is from when Grandma complained about how Mommy and Daddy were speaking about her. It relates to the removal of the old generation in light of a new, more confused one that shuns traditional value and respect.

“I no longer have the capacity to feel anything. I have no emotions. I have been drained, torn asunder disemboweled. I have, now, only my person, my body, my face.” In this quote, the Young Man refers to how he is devoid of personal quality. This is a profound statement in regard to the effect a society based on materialism, which was a major component of the play’s overarching theme.

Closed Prompt #2- 10/18/15

“The following passage is an excerpt from “The Other Paris,” a short story by the Canadian writer Mavis Gallant. Read the passage carefully. Then, in a well-written essay, explain how the author uses narrative voice and characterization to provide social commentary."

            This excerpt from “The Other Paris” is an excellent example of a short piece of fiction that has a great deal to say about its subject, even without the larger work to provide context. In this case, Gallant provides a hilariously satirical commentary on love and its relationship, or lack of one, to the social expectations of marriage. He achieves this through precise characterization of Carol and Howard, his description of their circumstances, and his narrative portrayal of their respective backgrounds.

            Gallant’s satire is apparent from the very beginning of the piece. He contrasts Carol’s vision of the ideal proposal, a deeply cliché depiction of just about any over-the-top movie proposal, with reality, which comes in the form of Howard’s bland request over a tuna-fish salad. He uses this scene to begin on a hilarious explanation of why the apparent lack of enthusiasm in the proposal was logically justifiable by either member of the engagement. Carol expresses concern about her lack of affection for Howard, but is soon comforted by the ridiculous advice of her college lectures, which explain that other bland and ordinary similarities among marital partners, such as “liking Irish setters” or having the same socioeconomic status were the key ingredients to a successful marriage. Through the juxtaposition of canned “movie industry” styled romance and the advice of Carol’s lectures, Gallant alienates love from his depiction of the societal idealization of marriage to make the point that without it, a truly arbitrary pair the likes of Howard and Carol could hit it off seamlessly.

            The second aspect of the narration that adds to Gallant’s satire is Howard’s background. Howard Mitchell is interested in marriage primarily because of his need for a “competent housemade,” stressing that his loneliness is simply due to “overwork,” and not because of an actual desire for human connection. Ironically, this is exactly the quality Carol rejoices over in her self-appraisal for saying “yes.” More importantly, he is pressured into the engagement by his sister, under the threat that he may become the one who “fills in at dinner.” This is an excellent depiction of the other, uglier aspect of socially acceptable marriage. Howard marries because he fears obsolescence in old age, and in quite a circular way, fears that he will fail his family, and thus society, simply by not getting married. With this point, Gallant hits on a deeply-rooted arbitration in the entire system. 

            Carol’s attempt to fall in love serves as another way in which Gallant pokes fun at the institution of marriage. Carol takes a cold, almost scientific approach to doing so, naively comparing the proper conditions for love to the proper conditions for the growth of a geranium. Gallant forms an amusing analogy, making Paris, the typical city for falling in love, into the ineffective ingredient for spurring her own infatuation. The heart of the passage’s humor is in the way that Carol finds nothing wrong with the lack of emotional investment in her relationship, even with regard to its most emotional components.

            While some stories are intent on depicting love as a mechanical process in itself, built on arbitrary surroundings and signifying little, Gallant’s excerpt goes deeper by describing a situation in which society accepts marriage as an institution independent and even excluding of love. He suggests that true love itself is neither present in cultural depictions such as in Hollywood; nor in the supposed culmination of a romantic relationship, such as marriage. Instead, both institutions miss it entirely, and their victims, Carol and Howard, do not know the difference between what these institutions offer and what they falsely represent.

Closed Prompt #1: 10/11 Analysis of Student Responses from the 2003 FRQ, Question 2

Student YYY (9):  

This student has a remarkable understanding of the tone of the passage. He/she not only recognizes the social satire, but most aptly characterizes it as attacking “the institution surrounding marriage.” He/she notices that it does not actually make fun of the principles of marriage itself, but rather the moronic associations with a stable marriage that society has established, as expressed in the behavior of Carol and Howard. The vocabulary is well-varied and the voice is humorous, even entertaining. The most sophisticated argument was perhaps the description of the way society’s rules for forming marital relationships drive marriages to destruction based on the “circular logic” of the rules themselves. The structure of the essay is also easy to follow, talking about characterization and then the recurring themes of the passage. This student’s interpretation is about as spot-on as an AP grader could hope, and thus the passage earns a well-deserved perfect score.

Student CCC (6):

            The opening and concluding paragraphs contribute very little to this essays’ argument, and despite the redundant use of “society,” the student has a strong understanding of the passage’s message. The real problem is that the student doesn’t really explore the points of understanding to any real depth, leaving the understanding of the social satire and characterization vague and incomplete. While he/she uses effective parallelism at one point, it is to make a point about how society affects both Howard and Carol, making generalizations that only apply to one of them at a time. This may be a comprehension issue, or simply a lack of planning which led to a rushed argument that required a quick summary of the message. It appears that the student could have benefitted from looking at the characterizations of each individually and making more generalizations about their actual similarities. Either way, the essay was effective enough to earn a 6.

Student JJJ (4):

            If this student had used “social commentary” one more time in writing this passage, I could imagine an AP grader throwing a fit. The argument is so trite, so uncreative, and so boring, that the essay probably earns its four points from generally good conventions and sentence structure alone. The student may understand the passage, but we will never know for sure. The message is essentially that there is a “social commentary” conveyed in the work, but the nature of this commentary is never elaborated on, and the characterization is addressed only to the extent of “character development,” which doesn’t actually bear significance. Instead, the passage emphasizes a satirical perspective related to love and marriage through the use of two static characters. The satire actually emerges from the fact that Carol and Howard behave in a certain way, which their development would only hinder. This essay is a good example of what can go wrong if a student develops a lukewarm argument backed by little more than a few references to the passage. 

Response to Course Material- 9/27

            While we are only a few weeks into AP Literature, I have learned a few valuable aspects about the course that will certainly help in the future. Our first big annotation assignment was on The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing by Michael Harvey. We had ample time to complete it, and although I was well aware that it was fairly long for reading in a single sitting, I still ended up starting the day before it was due. While I regret this decision because of the unnecessary stress it brought me, it did not affect the appreciation I had for the content of the piece. I especially enjoyed Harvey’s breakdown of the “pompous style” and how using too many nouns and linking verbs can prove fatal in academic writing. It made me reconsider my own style of writing and whether I hide behind the same clumsy phrases that clouded his examples. In many cases, I find that there is usually a much clearer way of stating something using simpler language, which can then more effectively develop truly complicated ideas.

            The academic skills emphasized in The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing contrast sharply with the other focus of the class so far, which is the “theater of the absurd.” We were first introduced to this through a general article describing the history of the practice, and have begun to analyze its use in Albee’s The American Dream. The dialogue is almost disorienting in its lack of meaning and direction. Conversations in the play never mean what is spoken, never amount to anything, and always fall into incongruity and non-sequiturs. The irony in this style is that deeper existential meanings hide behind the utter lack of consequence in the script. The absurdity discussed in the article seems to exist in order to hide a rather sophisticated commentary. This is the kind of play that only an already understanding audience could appreciate, because the true entertainment lies beneath the surface of the scene, setting, and even the characters. Sometimes as we read it in class, it can be hard to not laugh at the ridiculous contradictions that arise. It is actually fairly interesting how we would transition from reading something like Harvey’s book, which focuses on making the purpose of the writing more explicit, to Albee’s play, which goes completely in the opposite direction.

            The other article that we annotated, Susan Glaspell’s “A Jury of her Peers” had very different messages from both of the other pieces. To me, this story used plain but direct language to illustrate the lack of equality between the sexes in an early 20^th century rural setting. The men in the story only consider the women useful for comforting one another and worrying about trivial domestic tasks, when in fact they use their mutual understanding of the situation of another woman to deduce her involvement in a gruesome murder. I found it intriguing how they hide the evidence, as if to say that the events that led her to commit the crime, mainly linked to an abusing husband, were enough to justify her actions through the eyes of her “peers.” As with The American Dream, I look forward to the class discussions where we will be able to share insights into these works with one another, deepen our understanding, and form a variety of interpretations. 

Closed Prompt #2- 9/20/15 My Own Response

“In the two poems below, Keats and Longfellow reflect on similar concerns. Read the poems carefully. Then write an essay in which you compare and contrast the two poems, analyzing the poetic techniques each writer uses to explore his particular situation.”

            In “When I have Fears” and “Mezzo Cammin,” Keats and Longfellow use a variety stylistic techniques to meditate on the fear that they will not accomplish all that they envision for themselves in life. However, each poet addresses what can only be interpreted as a “mid-life crisis” through emphasis on different concerns. While each expresses worry about the future, Keats presents a tone which reflects more positively on what he has done with his life up to the moment that the poem describes, while Longfellow articulates his despairs about his life in general and places particular weight on what went wrong. While each conveys his individual message and style through different structural patterns, the common subject of the poems produces similarities as well.

            One can plainly see upon first reading that each of these poems contain similar messages. In “When I have Fears,” Keats reflects primarily on two fears. The first is that he will not write everything he feels he can before will “cease to be” (2). This is an anxiety commonly felt by artists of any kind, because art attains value through recognition. Keats alludes to the fact that he has great potential referring to his “teeming brain” and the “full ripen’d grain” of his work (2, 4). While these words suggest that he acknowledges his own intrinsic value, his second fear is that he will not enjoy material accomplishment with the line, “Till love and fame to nothingness do I sink” (14).  In general, he sees himself as on the right track to success, but at the moment considers that it is possible he may never realize his aspirations. However, Longfellow takes a different approach. In “Mezzo Cammin,” conveys a much greater sense of hopelessness, specifically mentioning how he frittered away his early years, saying, “…I have let / The years slip from me and have not fulfilled / The aspiration of my youth…” (1-3). Keats focuses only on the future, while Longfellow spends a great deal of the poem describing what lead him to this moment of despair. Interestingly, he claims it was “a care that almost killed” that led him to be midway through life with the feeling that he has accomplished nothing (7). Keats looks ahead and sees the daunting expectations he has set for himself, while Longfellow dwells on the folly of his past.

            In addition to theme, the poets use similar imagery to convey their messages. In each poem, the future is depicted as being above the past, with each speaker standing on a plane in between. In “When I have Fears,” Keats looks up to see “huge cloudy symbols of high romance,” and Longfellow sees “The cataract of Death far thundering from the heights” (14). While each paints a similar picture in the mind of the reader, the implications are strikingly different. Keats sees his hopes and aspirations in the sky, but cloudy and undefined, which makes him anxious for the future. Longfellow’s waterfall, on the other hand, symbolizes the inevitable conclusion to what he fears will be a pointless existence all together. In the case of Keats, his future is ridden with uncertainty which exists only out of the haphazard nature of life itself. Yet, Longfellow looks down from his vantage point and sees “[a] city in the twilight dim and vast,” a terrifyingly insignificant portrait of his “past” (11, 9). As he ponders this, he looks at the waterfall above him and its irreversibility as a reminder of his own grim fate. Both poets metaphorically portray the course of their lives and express despair at the daunting future ahead, but Keats sinks “to nothingness” in the sense that he fears he will amount to nothing while Longfellow considers it the essence of his being.

            Keats and Longfellow offer two evaluations of themselves midway through life. In doing so, the offer the reader two different reasons to fear his/her own obsolescence. “When I Have Fears” is for the reader who has not yet reached his/her goals, still striving for success, but perhaps pondering the possibility that he/she will fall short. In contrast, “Mezzo Cammin” allows no consideration of success, only that worrying about the future is more damaging to it than any type of “indolence…pleasure” or “fret of restless passions” (5, 6). Through their language and imagery, both poems leave the reader questioning the value of his/her life so far, in addition to what is to come. 

Closed Prompt #1-2008 Question 1- Comparing John Keats’ “When I Have Fears” to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “Mezzo Cammin”

Analysis on Essay by Student 1A (9)

            This student shows an excellent understanding of the similarities and differences in the two poems, and is able to compare them regarding both the themes and the poetic devices used. While the argument is not highly sophisticated, it provides adequate evidence for its claims and remains persuasive. The student does a good job in the introduction by immediately giving a brief overview of the common subject between the two poems, which he/she phrases as “unfulfilled dreams and the imminence of death,” and summarizes the way in which the authors interpret this subject differently. The student emphasizes the different perspectives by stating that the imminence of death threatens Keats’ aspirations, while Longfellow considers his inevitable end to leave him devoid of aspiration all together. However, Longfellow does actually say in line 8 that sorrow kept him from what he “may accomplish yet.” The student perhaps ignores some more ambiguous language in the Longfellow poem to aid in the discussion of the differences stated in the thesis. The second paragraph seems to build on the idea that the similarities are mostly restricted to the beginnings of the poems, but this is understandable since the prompt emphasizes “poetic techniques,” and is supported by ample evidence. The third and final paragraphs provide very persuasive comparisons using the imagery and the differences in context, and overall the essay certainly deserves an 8. If the student had more closely defined the terms “anaphora” and “alliteration,” it may have qualified as a 9.

Analysis on Essay by Student 1B (5)

            While there are few conventions errors in the piece and the language flows fairly well, the flaws with this essay that earned it a lower score arise in the structure. The student does not establish a strong thesis in the beginning, pointing out a main difference and a weakly summarized similarity. The student spends most of the essay beating into the ground a few obvious metaphors that caught his or her attention. While the interpretation of these metaphors is well thought-out, it operates under the premise that the existence of the metaphors themselves is a valid point of comparison. In addition, the analyses of the two poems are never brought side-by-side, leaving the student’s argument unpersuasive. Had he or she added another paragraph in which to address similarities, he or she may have earned a 6, but it is unlikely considering the shallowness of the existing comparison. This student would have fared better if the prompt had favored individual interpretation over compare and contrast.

Analysis on Essay by Student 1C (3)

            There are many problems with this essay in structure, mechanics, and quality of interpretation. The student does not elaborate on any of his/her claims, which show only basic understanding of the poems. In the first paragraph, the student opens with a similarity about what one can only assume is the rhythmic pattern of the verse, although he/she never elaborates, probably because the observation is only a general one. The main point in the second paragraph is that Keats presents himself as “ready to die.” However, the poem suggests quite the opposite in some ways, which include the final couplet, “Of the wide world I stand alone and think, / Till love and fame to nothingness do I sink.” These lines imply that the speaker has desire for success and romance, but is facing a crisis over the time he has left and his impending fate. Regardless, such a counter argument is essentially moot, since the student has not provided enough evidence to support any interpretation. The third paragraph addresses the Longfellow poem in much the same way by making generalizations and then redundantly concluding from them. The conclusion does little more than combine the two main generalizations about each poem, for which the position is already questionable. The essay does not demonstrate the proficiency of any higher rating due to its ineptitude, and avoids being labelled as a 2 only because of overall coherency.